Iraq

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What contingency plans are now being prepared in liaison with intergovernmental and non-governmental humanitarian agencies for co-ordinated humanitarian operations to feed, care for and protect the civilian population in Iraq should there be war.

Baroness Amos: The Government are holding regular discussions with other governments, UN agencies, NGOs and other humanitarian actors about contingency planning for a range of eventualities in Iraq. In the event of military action, a key priority would be to minimise the suffering of the Iraqi people. This would include enabling, as quickly as possible, the provision of immediate humanitarian assistance by those best placed to do so; access for other humanitarian actors; and re-establishment of the UN Oil For Food Programme distribution network.
	In addition to its ongoing humanitarian programme in Iraq and its annual support for UN agencies' global emergency preparedness activities, the Department for International Development is providing £3.5 million to support UN humanitarian contingency planning for Iraq, including the prepositioning of basic supplies, through funding to UNHCR, UNICEF, WFP, WHO, OCHA and UNSECOORD. This situation is under close review.

Pakistan: Human Rights

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answers by Baroness Amos on 4 November 2002 (WA75), 6 November 2002 (WA103) and 25 November 2002 (WA17) about human rights in Pakistan and the situation of Asif Ali Zardari, why they have not raised this case with the Pakistani Government in view of the court case registered by the Sindh High Court in early 2002 against certain police officers with respect to Mr Zardari's ill treatment;
	Further to the Written Answers by Baroness Amos on 4 November 2002 (WA75), 6 November 2002 (WA103) and 25 November 2002 (WA17) about human rights in Pakistan and the situation of Asif Ali Zardari, why they have not raised this case with the Pakistani Government in light of the length of the proceedings against Mr Zardari and the failure of the Pakistani authorities to comply with the Supreme Court order for a timetable for the completion of all proceedings against Mr Zardari.

Baroness Amos: We regulary engage with the Pakistani authorities on a wide range of human rights issues. Where appropriate, we make bilateral representations in specific cases on behalf of British nationals. Mr Zardari is not a British national. The UK may on occasion raise specific cases of non-British nationals. However, we are not entitled to provide the formal consular or diplomatic protection that we can offer to British nationals. We have not concluded that there are reasons for the UK to raise Mr Zardari's case.

Angola: Publish What You Pay Initiative

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made with the Publish What You Pay initiative in Angola; and whether they will propose to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development that a web page be established where members of the public in Angola and other countries would be able to see which multinational companies were complying with the initiative and how much they had paid to the host governments.

Baroness Amos: The Publish What You Pay initiative is an NGO campaign to disclose payments made by extractive companies to each host country. Further information on the Publish What You Pay campaign may be obtained from their website; www.publishwhatyoupay.org.
	The Prime Minister launched the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in September 2002. The EITI is separate from but complementary to Publish What You Pay. The EITI aims to make transparent both payments from companies to government and revenues received by governments (as company payments can make up less then 50 per cent of government revenues from the sector). The data disclosed will be made publicly available.
	An international multi-stakeholder workshop on the EITI was hosted by DfID in London on 11 and 12 February and was attended by some 70 participants. Representatives from the Government of Angola and from the state-owned oil company Sonangol were present and we envisage their further involvement in moving the initiative forward.
	Further information about the EITI is available from DfID's website www.dfid.gov.uk.

Congo: UN Expert Panel

Baroness Williams of Crosby: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the light of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1457, they are now investigating those United Kingdom companies and individuals listed in Annex III to the report of the Panel of Experts on Congo and reminding them of their obligations under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

Baroness Amos: SCR 1457 (2003) extended the mandate of the UN Expert Panel for a further six months. In the light of the panel's findings, Her Majesty's Government will consider taking appropriate action where there is clear evidence of wrongdoing.

Capita: FCO Contracts

Baroness Blatch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What contracts have been awarded to the Capita Group by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

Baroness Amos: The FCO has two contracts with Capita. One is for the recruitment of administrative assistants and the other for the recruitment of specialist staff. The value of the contracts over their lifetime is estimated at £917k and £1.06 million respectively, £861k of which is taken up by expenditure on advertising.

Reproductive Healthcare

Baroness Masham of Ilton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Amos on 13 February (WA132), whether their statement that they "do not provide assistance to stabilise population growth" is consistent with their funding by unrestricted grants of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), whose September 2000 audit report states that 72 per cent of its 1998–99 programme expenditure was spent on "population management".

Baroness Amos: The United Nations Population Fund's programme expenditure is focused on improving reproductive health services in the developing world and not on "stabilising population growth".

Zimbabwe: EU Aid

Lord Acton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much bilateral aid is paid to Zimbabwe by each European Union member state; and how much was given to Zimbabweans through the European Commission's Conflict and Humanitarian Office by (a) the United Kingdom and (b) other European Union member states.

Baroness Amos: European Union member states provided E67 million (£46 million) for humanitarian assistance through bilateral channels and E88.8 million (£60 million) through the European Commission to Zimbabwe in 2002. In each case the UK provided E51.2m (£34.8 million) and E17.4m (£11.6 million) respectively.
	The table below sets out the position by country. Figures in the left-hand column include contributions to UN appeals. Figures in the right-hand column represent EC Humanitarian Office (ECHO) support in full and attributed to each member state according to budget share.
	
		
			  Bilateral (E millions) ECHO (E millions) 
			 UK 51.2 17.4 
			 Austria 0.2 2.0 
			 Belgium 0.4 3.2 
			 Denmark 0.4 1.6 
			 Finland 0.3 1.2 
			 France 0.8 13.8 
			 Germany 4.2 21.4 
			 Greece No Data 1.3 
			 Ireland 1.2 1.0 
			 Italy 1.0 10.5 
			 Luxembourg No Data 0.2 
			 Netherlands 1.1 5.2 
			 Portugal No Data 1.2 
			 Spain No Data 6.2 
			 Sweden 6.8 2.5 
			 Total 67.6 88.8 
		
	
	Note:
	ECHO figures to 19 December 2002.
	All figures provisional.

Occupied Territories: Use of UK-supplied Equipment by Israel

Lord Campbell-Savours: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there have been any breaches of the Israeli assurances about the use of United Kingdom-supplied equipment in the Occupied Territories exported under previous administrations.

Baroness Amos: In the written reply of my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary to Menzies Campbell on 15 April 2002, (Official Report, column 723W), he informed Parliament that we had questions about other possible breaches of the Israeli assurances about the use of UK-supplied equipment in the Occupied Territories exported under previous administrations. The Government have looked into the issue further and I am now able to inform Parliament of the outcome of our inquiries.
	The only equipment that has been identified as being used by the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) in the Occupied Territories, and that can justifiably be regarded as constituting a breach of the assurances, is a combination of Puma and Nachpadon armoured personnel carriers (APCs). These are derivative APCs on a Centurion chassis, and which therefore have a significant and recognisable UK content. Parliament was informed of this in the reply of my honourable friend Mr Bradshaw to a Parliamentary Question from Mr Galloway on 11 March 2002.
	In our view, the Israeli assurances did not cover equipment of components exported by the UK to a third country, which components were then incorporated in that country into products for onward export. The announcement of my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary of 8 July 2002 set out how the Government will approach licence applications for goods where it is understood that the goods are to be incorporated into products for onward export.
	We intend to inform the Israelis of the results of our inquiries. We shall re-emphasise our current concerns about exporting arms to Israel that might be used against Palestinian targets, and that our policy on assessing Israeli export applications has not changed; we shall continue to assess export licence applications for the proposed export of controlled goods to Israel on a case-by-case basis against the consolidated EU and national arms export licensing criteria.
	Our staff will continue to monitor the deployment and the use of equipment by the IDF in the Occupied Territories during their regular tours of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem; and will report to me any sightings of British-supplied equipment.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 6 February (WA42) concerning equality, what is the position as regards functions which cannot be partitioned between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The functions of North/South implementation bodies are not "partitioned". Equality schemes for the bodies do not apply to the exercise of their functions outside Northern Ireland.

Northern Ireland: Smoking

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to reduce (a) smoking in public places in Northern Ireland; (b) the number of pregnant women smoking; and (c) passive smoking involving young children.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, in collaboration with other departments and agencies, is finalising a five-year Tobacco Action Plan which has been the subject of widespread consultation across Northern Ireland. The plan, which identifies pregnant women as one of three key target groups, also addresses smoking in public places and passive smoking in the context of action to protect non-smokers from tobacco smoke.
	Following publication, an implementation group will be established to take forward the agreed action points.

Motoring Offences: UK Citizens Abroad

Viscount Simon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What investigations they have conducted to ensure United Kingdom motorists receive access to justice in foreign courts; and
	In what circumstances a United Kingdom citizen, disqualified from driving by a foreign court, would be able to appeal to a United Kingdom court against disqualification; and[H
	Whether translation facilities are available to United Kindom citizens charged with motoring offences in other European member states.

Lord Filkin: A defendant's right to a fair hearing and to the assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court are both enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, to which all the member states of the European Union are signatories.
	Following a consultation exercise in 2001, the Govenment have introduced measures to implement the 1998 EU Convention on Driving Disqualifications in the Crime (International Co-operation) Bill currently before Parliament. Under the convention, a disqualification imposed in another member state will also be recognised and enforced in the driver's state of residence.
	The Bill provides a right of appeal for any UK resident aggrieved at the decision to enforce a foreign disqualification in the UK. An appeal may be made on any of the grounds laid down in the Bill for recognising a disqualification. This includes determining whether a defendant was duly notified by the state of the offence of the proceedings against him and entitled to take part in them, which provides an important safeguard where a disqualification has been imposed in absentia. The appeal will not extend to the circumstances of the original offence. Rights of appeal against conviction will already have been dealt with in the state of the offence.

Armed Forces Overseas Allowances: Gulf Service

Lord Rogan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether reserve members of the Armed Forces who are called up for service in the Gulf will be entitled to overseas allowances; and, if not, why not; and
	Whether members of the Armed Forces currently based in the United Kingdom will be entitled to overseas allowances if and when deployed to the Gulf; and, if not, why not; and
	Whether members of the Armed Forces currently based overseas and in receipt of overseas allowances will still benefit from these allowances, if and when deployed to the Gulf; and, if not, why not.

Lord Bach: Regular and reserve personnel deployed to the Gulf from the United Kingdom will usually not receive local overseas allowance (LOA) as the operational welfare package (OWP) is being made available to the great majority of those engaged on operations. LOA is constructed around the lifestyle of personnel based overseas, but the needs of those deployed on operations are quite different and are addressed by the OWP. The package will be delivered in stages, commensurate with the operation. The intention is to implement the communication elements of the package as soon as possible, taking account of the lack of infrastructure and harsh environment in many deployed locations. This will allow deployed personnel 20 minutes of publicly funded telephone calls per week; free forces aerogrammes and concessionary parcel rates; access to the internet and e-mail; and newspapers. Additionally, BFBS TV and radio; televisions, video recorders and videotapes; Expeditionary Forces Institute shops; and publicly funded laundry will be provided as soon as practicable.
	Local overseas allowance (LOA) is not part of the military salary or a reward for overseas service. It is a tax-free cost of living addition paid only in circumstances were personnel are likely to incur greater day-to-day expenditure overseas than they would in the United Kingdom. This is not generally the case for those deployed on operations. It is accepted that those personnel who are temporarily deployed away from their permanent, LOA earning, duty station, while no longer incurring the full range of additional costs associated with that station, still have ongoing financial commitments overseas, and that many have families who remain at the permanent duty station. Consequently, all service personnel continue to receive the full LOA rate for the first 17 days of their deployment. Additionally, married accompanied personnel continue to receive the full LOA rate unless their accompanying spouse also leaves the permanent duty station for more than 17 days, at which point an abatement of approximately 35 per cent is applied. Single or married unaccompanied personnel lose 20 per cent of their full LOA rate after the first 17 days.

Gulf Service Units: E-mail Facilities

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many e-mail terminals will each service unit in the Gulf possess for welfare e-mails; and whether there will be any security censorship of these messages.

Lord Bach: Subject to operational requirements and technical feasibility, one e-mail terminal will be made available for around every 100 personnel. E-mail messages will not be censored.

Challenger 2 Tanks

Lord Vivian: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How long the remaining modifications to convert the Challenger 2 tanks for desert operations will take on arrival in the Gulf theatre.

Lord Bach: A range of modifications to improve the performance in desert conditions of the Challenger 2 tanks deploying to the Gulf will be completed in time for any future operations. I am withholding details of how long the remaining modifications will take once the tanks arrive in theatre under Exemption 1 (Defence, security and international relations) of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.

MoD Test and Evaluation Requirements: QinetiQ LTPA

Lord Carter: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Ministry of Defence has now signed the long-term partnering agreement with QinetiQ for the delivery of its test and evaluation capability.

Lord Bach: The Ministry of Defence has just successfully concluded a long-term partnering agreement (LTPA) with QinetiQ for the delivery of the MoD's test and evaluation requirements. MoD customers examined a number of options for the delivery of future test and evaluation services and concluded that a long-term partnering agreement with QinetiQ was the approach most likely to maximise value for money and ensure the continuing success of these key capabilities.
	The new contract, which will take effect from 1 April 2003, will replace the current short-term facilities management contract which was put in place at QinetiQ vesting and which expires on 31 March.
	The LTPA contract, which is worth up to £5.6 billion to QinetiQ over its 25-year life, will progressively introduce efficiency measures and innovation in order to reduce overall test and evaluation costs. The contract, which will be the subject of periodic review at agreed intervals, is expected to deliver savings to MoD of around £700 million (at current prices) over its lifetime.
	The LTPA establishes a framework within which the MoD's relationship with its contractor can grow, over time. QinetiQ will be given opportunities to develop further innovation and make proposals to achieve better value for money and, based on performance, there will be opportunities for business growth.

Reservists: Operations in Sierra Leone and DRC

Baroness Thornton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements are in place to allow reservists to be called out to support operations in Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Lord Bach: A new call-out order has been made under Section 56 of the Reserve Forces Act 1996 so that reservists may continue to be called out to support operations in Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This order will take effect from 1 March 2003, the date the previous order expired. There are no plans to call reservists up compulsorily under this order, as it is expected that the small numbers needed will be met through volunteers for service in those countries.

Tall Buildings: Guidance

Lord Desai: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they welcome the joint good practice guide on tall buildings produced by English Heritage and the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment.

Lord Rooker: The guidance note on tall buildings prepared jointly by English Heritage and the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) is published today.
	The Government expect new development to be well-designed, safe and sustainable, whether it comprises a tall building or low rise. It considers that all buildings should be designed with regard to their likely impact on their immediate surroundings and the wider environment. The policy is set out in PPG1 General Policy and Principles, and is supported by good practice guidance, By Design.
	In response to last year's Select Committee inquiry on tall buildings, the Government encouraged English Heritage and CABE to finalise their draft guidance note Guidance on tall buildings, taking full account of the committee's recommendations. The Government consider that such a note, in support of government policy and existing good practice advice, will contribute to sound planning decisions on tall buildings.
	The Government therefore welcome the publication of the joint guidance note. The Government consider that the good practice advice provided will be of value to local planning authorities in drawing up their planning policies for tall buildings, and capable of being material to the determination of planning applications.
	I will place the copy of the document in the Libraries of the House shortly.

Licensed Premises: Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order

Lord Burlison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What recent decisions they have taken in relation to the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order following the consultation exercise last year and the widespread concern about the increasing number of licensed premises.

Lord Rooker: In January 2002, the Government issued a consultation document on possible changes to the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order. Responses were to be received by 24 April 2002. We received over 2,000 responses which the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has since been considering.
	During the course of the parliamentary debates that have taken place on the Licensing Bill, attention has been drawn to an issue on which we received many representations as part of the Use Classes review. There is widespread concern that the inclusion of pubs and bars with other uses such as restaurants and cafes in the A3 Class is contributing to the increase in the number of licensed premises in some areas and that such changes in use do not require planning permission. I have considered these representations carefully and I am announcing today that it is our intention to change the Use Classes Order so as to put pubs and bars into a separate class. The effect of this change will be to require any proposal to change use of an existing building into a pub or bar to apply for planning permission.
	I expect to make a full statement on the outcome of our consultation on proposals for changes to the Use Classes Order shortly.

NHS: Mattresses and Fire Regulations

Earl Howe: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any mattresses which do not meet the standards laid down in the Furniture and Furnishings (Fire) (Safety) Regulations 1988 have been purchased by, and are in use in, the National Health Service.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Mattresses currently included on the national framework agreement negotiated by the National Health Service Purchasing and Supply Agency meet Health Technical Memorandum 87—the National Health Service fire code document for textiles and furniture. This standard recommends compliance with a higher level of ignition source than the Furniture and Furnishings (Fire) (Safety) Regulations 1988.
	However, the framework agreement is not a mandatory contract. NHS trusts are responsible for choosing their own procurement route for these products. Therefore, they may buy products from suppliers that are not listed on the framework agreement. Information about which mattresses are bought by individual trusts is not held centrally.

Asylum Practitioners: Standards

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have received any reports from the Legal Services Commission, the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors and the Office of the Immigration Services commissioner about the alleged poor quality of work done by certain firms acting for asylum seekers; whether the procedures for weeding out incompetent and exploitative advisers are working effectively; and whether they will consult the above organisations on ways of raising standards.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Legal Services Commission (LSC) reports on a regular basis to my department on measures being taken to ensure the quality of publicly funded immigration and asylum practitioners. Funding has been withdrawn from firms if the LSC is not satisfied that required standards are being met. As solicitors are self-regulating there is no requirement for the OSS to report to this department, but the LSC and OSS have worked closely for a number of years to take action against unscrupulous or incompetent practitioners. The OISC has a duty to promote good practice among all legal service providers and has no enforcement power other than referral to designated professional bodies (DPBs), but submits an annual report to the Secretary of State which reports on the effectiveness of each DPB in regulating its members in the provision of immigrant and asylum legal services.

Absences from Work

Lord Inglewood: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they accept the Work Foundation's findings (on 27 January 2003) that overall absence rates in 2002 were 1.5 per cent in the information technology sector; 1.54 per cent in the utilities sector; 2.23 per cent in the manufacturing sector and 7.86 per cent in the public/voluntary sector; and if so, whether they plan any action as a result.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Work Foundation estimates are based upon a small sample of employers. The estimates are therefore subject to significant sampling and non-sampling error. Estimates from the Labour Force Survey, a much larger household survey of employees, suggest that in autumn 2002 absence rates were 1.8 per cent in the private sector and 2.3 per cent in the public sector.

Burma/Myanmar: British Companies and Export Credits

Lord Jordan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What amounts of export credit were given to British companies trading with Burma/Myanmar during the years 1998 to 2002; and whether there is any government policy that will restrict the granting of export credits for trade with Burma/Myanmar on the grounds of human rights in that country.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The UK's Export Credits Guarantee Department (ECGD) has not supported any amount of export credits to British companies trading with Burma during the years 1998 to 2002. ECGD is off cover for Burma because the risks are unacceptable and in view of the political and human rights situation in Burma, it is government policy not to encourage trade or investment that directly or indirectly benefits the current Burmese regime.

Syria

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they believe that Syria possesses weapons of mass destruction.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We are concerned by persistent reports that Syria is pursuing a programme for the development of weapons of mass destruction.
	We regularly urge all states to sign and ratify all the treaties and conventions covering the development of such weapons.

OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will list the submissions made to the United Kingdom national contact point for complaints against breaches of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, giving in each case the date of the original submission, the name of the company or companies involved, the country in which the breach is alleged to have occurred, the action taken, and the date of the reply by the National Contact Point.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Since the most recent revision of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises which took place in June 2000, the United Kingdom national contact point (NCP) has been in receipt of one formal complaint, received on 27 February 2002, in respect of an alleged breach by the company Anglo-American in Zambia. The national contact point replied to this submission on 1 March 2002. Further details with regard to action taken are governed by the confidentiality provisions of the guidelines.

VAT: Housing and Construction Work

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that a reduction in the rate of VAT charged for repair, maintenance and improvement of buildings is likely to improve the balance between reuse of existing structures and new building; whether this will help to diminish the amount of unfit housing and generate more sustainable employment; and, in particular, whether they are studying the results of a tax reduction of this kind in France.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: This Government have already reduced the rate of VAT to 5 per cent for certain services where a price cut will have the greatest effect on the regeneration and renewal of the UK's housing stock. In Budget 2001, we introduced reduced rates for the renovation of dwellings that have been empty for at least three years and for certain residential conversions. These measures help to bring vacant homes back into use and encourage better use of existing housing stock. We keep under review the use of other reduced rates for construction work where these will help with regeneration and renewal but we believe that unemployment can be tackled more effectively by targeted schemes such as the New Deal. The outcome of France's tax reduction, and reduced rates generally, are due to be reviewed by the European Commission this year, and we will be monitoring that work closely.

Illegal Meat Imports

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In the light of the 600 alleged seizures of illegal meat by sniffer dogs in the last six months, how many persons have been prosecuted; and
	Why there have been so few prosecutions of people caught bringing illegal meats into the United Kingdom in the last year; and
	Whether they intend to prosecute people caught bringing illegal meats into the United Kingdom.

Lord Whitty: No prosecutions have been undertaken as a result of seizures made by the detector dogs.
	A decision to bring a prosecution before the courts is a matter for the enforcement authority. It would take into account a number of factors, including the weight of evidence to prove intent to break the laws in question and the ability to bring the offender before the British courts. These criteria may not be easy to satisfy in the case of air passengers bringing in meat illegally, especially where small quantities are seized.
	In many cases, other penalties may be more appropriate. All seizures are confiscated and destroyed. We have been working with the Home Office to add details of repeat offenders to the warning index used by immigration officers.
	Officials from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs have discussed with enforcement officers on a number of occasions the circumstances under which prosecutions might be brought against those importing meat illegally. We have made clear that prosecutions are an important aspect of deterrence which we would like to see used where there is clear evidence of a serious breach in the rules. We have also worked with the Magistrates' Association to raise awareness of the seriousness of illegal imports and to highlight the penalties available.